Republican Views on Foreign Aid

Foreign aid is an issue that is contested greatly between the parties. Republican views on foreign aid include the belief that the United States should not provide aid to other countries unless it also feeds America’s own interests or is a more economical form of peace keeping. Republicans believe that foreign aid is the equivalent of welfare for nations, and therefore disagree strongly with the concept of providing this money unless there is a direct benefit to the United States involved. They also believe that the United States should be taking care of their own financial concerns first and foremost, and that money should not be spent on other countries when it could be spent on our own. They believe firmly in refusing aid to countries who foster terrorism, believing that a country that supports terrorists is just as terrible as terrorists themselves.

The Millennium Challenge Corporation Model

Republicans believe that foreign aid should feed America’s national interest. Included in this category is foreign aid that involves the “peaceful development of less advanced and vulnerable societies in critical parts of the world.” They also believe in using assistance as a means of keeping the peace, since it is economically cheaper and does not cost lives in the way that military engagement would. For these reasons, they believe that aid should be awarded to countries that either have a history of or a good reason for hope of a positive outcome. They refer to this model as the Millennium Challenge Corporation Model after the Millennium Challenge Account, which provided aid to countries that had met the challenge of reform. Republicans state that under this model, “foreign governments must, in effect, compete for the dollars by showing respect for the rule of law, free enterprise, and measurable results.” They believe that this keeps the money from being misused repeatedly, stating, “in short, aid money should follow positive outcomes, not pleas for more cash in the same corrupt official pockets.” The point of this methodology, first and foremost, is “insisting upon measurable results to ensure that development assistance is actually making a difference in the lives of the world’s poor.”

Spreading Democracy

Republicans also believe in providing aid to countries that are attempting to create democratic governments. For this reason they believe in continued aid to Latin American countries who support democratic governments, stating that “administration will be guided by the principles of respect for sovereignty, private initiative, multilateral action, free politics and markets, the rule of law, and regard for variety. A commitment to NAFTA can enlarge it into a vision for hemispheric free trade, drawing nations closer in business, common commercial standards, dispute resolution, and education.” For this same reason Republicans hope to work with Southeast Asia, stating that the right presence in this area “will promote democracy, open markets, and human rights for the betterment of the people of Asia and the United States.”

U.S. Aid In Africa

Republicans believe in providing aid to Africa, particularly to address health issues on this continent. They believe that aiding Africa with addressing the HIV/AIDS pandemic is in the best interest of the U.S. Republicans also believe in providing aid to Africa that will help end the starvation that is prominent in many countries. Many Republicans hope that an alleviation of this issue may be a cost-effective way to keep the peace on a continent that is often swarming with internal conflict. They believe that this can be done both through private sector donations and charitable donations, stating, ” Millions live in poverty and suffer from diseases. Africa needs economic opportunity, foreign investment, and access to markets, food, and medicine. The United States will support international organizations and non-governmental organizations that can improve the lives of Africans.”

Mitt Romney on Foreign Aid

Mitt Romney recognizes the value of foreign aid, both as a means for the U.S. to gain and as a means for humanitarian efforts. Romney believes strongly in not providing aid to countries that “oppose America’s interests.” He also hopes to see significant reform to foreign aid policies. He wishes to see more public-private partnership on aid projects, more investment in small- and medium-sized businesses as a means of aid, and a reduction in barriers to American trade and investment. While Romney does believe aid is important, he also believes that the foreign aid budget needs to be reduced, because America should not be borrowing money to for foreign aid. He believes that efforts would be better spent encouraging other countries to provide foreign aid themselves, stating “I happen to think it doesn’t make a lot of sense for us to borrow money from the Chinese to go give to another country for humanitarian aid . . .We ought to get the Chinese to take care of the people that are taking that borrowed money.” He also believes that increasing a focus on trade would benefit the economies of poorer nations, reducing the need for aid overall.

Rand Paul on Foreign Aid

One Republican who has been making waves over this issue is Rand Paul. Paul is calling for a drastic decrease in foreign aid spending and a limitation of engagement in foreign affairs. Essentially, Paul’s proposed policies amount to the gradual elimination of all foreign aid. GOP speechwriter Michael Gerson, along with other Republican hopefuls for the 2016 primary such as Chris Christie, believe that Paul’s policies are too drastic. Gerson discussed the consequences of a policy such as this, stating, “I’ve seen its effect in sub-Saharan Africa and other places. This would cause misery for millions of people on AIDS treatment. It would betray hundreds of thousands of children receiving malaria treatment. These are things you can’t ignore in a presidential candidate. This is a perfect case of how a person can have good intentions but how an ideology can cause terrible misery. He will need to explain that.” Paul’s party has made a point of voicing that his views are not in line with those of Republicans as a whole. Christie spoke out against Paul’s ideas as being “dangerous,” and Senator Bob Corker stated, “I think most people on this side of the aisle understand that this is terrible public policy.”